54 



ON THE ORIGIN OP 



The only accusative sign which ihe Tamil has, is ei. This, I 

 need scarcely say, is different from all signs in the Sinhalese, in 

 ■which the only termination that may approach the Dravidian, is 

 the Canarese «, and this is of very rare occurrence in our language. 



In turning our attention from the mere formation of the case- 

 signs, to the Syntax of the accusative case, we find the Sinhalese 

 to accord with the Sanskrit and the Latin; e. g., where reference 

 is made to duration of time, all the above languages use the accusa- 

 tive. For other affinities, see Sidatsangara, p. 29. 



The Instrumental Case. The Telugu changes the locative ti 

 into ta, to express the instrumental or the auxiliary, both which are 

 treated by Tamils and others as the instrumental. See Sidatsangara, 

 p. 3 1 . Now, according to Caldwell, the Canarese instrumental, suffix 

 im is identical with in, the Tamil ' ablative of motion.' If this is 

 the case, its tendency to confound the instrumental with the ablative,, 

 is in accordance with the Latin and the Greek, which confound the 

 auxiliary with the instrumental. Even the English, in which, as 

 Caldwell points out, ' by ' in the sense of * close by ' was originally a 

 locative, would indicate the origin of the Telugu instrumental. 



The Tamil suffix for the instrumental is clearly al, and bears no 

 analogy to the Sinhalese terminations a, a, u> hu in the singular, 

 and an, ana, na, n, and un in the plural. 



The use of the instrumental is gradually getting into disuse 

 amongst the lower orders of the Sinhalese. There is also much 

 difficulty felt by learners in comprehending the difference between 

 the nominative and the instrumental. People say mama harana 

 vcede=nan sekir velei, Tamil Now, karana=sekir is not a 

 complete verb. It is devoid of vitality, though possessed of an 

 attribute, and the tense. It approaches nearest to an English par- 

 ticiple; and, considering its function in the above sentence, we may 

 call it the relative participle, or as the Tamil Grammarians name 

 it, peyer echam 'noun-defect' or 'noun-complement;' i e., as ex- 

 plained by Caldwell, a word which requires the complement of a 

 noun to complete its signification. We find it always associated 



